Because that’s the game being played. It’s like getting mad at someone for tackling you in football.
If you just want to run up and down the field without getting tackled, you have other options besides American football. So, maybe don’t suit up, take the field, and then start arguing with the defense about how their game play impedes your ability to have fun.
This is what makes me scared (not scared but more like ruffled) is when someone comes in and tries to change the game what is working.
And you base this off of what? The devs coded the mechanics for suicide ganking -which signifies developer intent. Moreover, they have not declared it an exploit, in spite of the fact that they know it exists. So, you’re just making stuff up now.
Fine, let’s get rid of concord. Problem solved. No more suicide ganking. Or how about this, do what the other lore nerds do, and either ask for an explanation, or come up with one yourself. In fact, didn’t a player come up with how ships get their energy (@Ashterothi I don’t know if you can answer this, but I wouldn’t blame you for ignoring the nonsense that is this thread)
But you don’t want that, because lore consistency and immersion isn’t your actual goal. It’s getting rid of ganking.
Going to act like the only solution to a lore issue is to nuke an entire freaking play style. You know what, real life asteroid fields are actually super spread out, and nothing like what you see in Star Wars or Eve online. Therefore, mining has to go.
Mining is ruining the game. No one can deny that.
In my opinion, industrialists in EVE are forced to take part in non-consent pvp…because, as a whole (I’m am speaking of Industrialists as a group, here)…industrialists as a whole benefit financially, ingame, from pvp destruction.
The industrialist “lifestyle” of “isk earning” in EVE is based, to the best of my knowledge, almost entirely on destruction of player owned in-game goods, that includes ships involved in non-consent and mutual consent pvp.
If…if, industrialists did not benefit financially, in game, upon the destruction of other player’s in-game goods, you might have a point; but, as the game stands now, a successful industrialist can pay for an Omega subscription to the game because of their participation, even at a remove, of non-consensual pvp due to actively participating in their chosen ingame activity.
I believe this is why the argument to play on SISI is so often put forward in these threads as an industrialist on SISI can play without the hazards Tranquility provides, the downside of SISI, of course, being the periodic resets.
meh. ran out of likes. Probably a good sign that I’ve done enough internet nerd fighting for one day.
Now, let’s see what we got in the ol’ upvote folder…
I honestly dont understand what your point is with a perfect police force.
My argument is, that we need the game to be immersive and for the “universe” to be alive. Illogical happenings, because of flawed game mechanics that promote a unrealistic fantasy setting has to be cut off, for the game to prosper.
You make a fair point, the best so far - when it comes to territorial fights. However i think the system should have a more realistic approach, if we are talking about territorial fights. Like there is in 0.0. That is a super cool system of fighting.
The “i know i will die and all my crew members etc. will but i must kill this miner anyway, cause there is no other possible way to do it” is just bad.
Many people in this thread have said “how about no concord” i think that would be great. The problem right now is, as a industrialist you cannot avoid highsec, you have to transport stuff there and its really frustraighting, cause you have to take these illogical game designs into consideration when transporting stuff.
You have to sort of say “there is a chance that 50 ships with 500 crew members each suicides this big ship, to get my stuff so i must not bring too much”. In my opinion it makes no sense.
Nobody said that.
Then tell me what you imagin? This is honestly my problem. There is no none-crazy way to explain this scenario, when you do lose your ship to highsec ganking.
It doesn’t break immersion for me, as there have always been suicidal warriors (Kamikazes, Berserkers, Immortals, Al Queda, to name a few) who are willing to die for a cause. That cause does not have to be rational at all, (After all, who flies fully loaded airliners into buildings just to make a point?) the warriors just need to believe it is their path to a better afterlife.
If millions of people say the same thing, the likelyhood that there is something about it thats correct is a lot higher, than when a few does.
In business especially - if you have hordes of players leaving cause of highsec ganking, its relevant for the company in question to reconsider its game design.
The issue at hand is that we know for a fact that a lot of people have left the game due to highsec ganking (go through the forum - it seems to be a recorring theme). EVE is losing a lot of playes to this, and its just bad game design, when the world you play and fantasize in, is illogical and nonsensical (in the litterate meaning of the word nonsensical) - you dont just suicide your crew to prove that mining is boring.
Yeah, I’m starting to feel like I’m being baited. You’re either a legit idiot or a brilliant troll. Either way, I’m done arguing for the day.
Try to not destroy my play style while I’m gone.
Pick 1
I got both gate camped and ganked, within a few weeks of joining the game. And I am still here 6 months later…in which time I have not lost a single ship to either cause despite being highly active and travelling all over Eve. I now have so many ships and so much ISK that to lose a ship is piffling anyway.
Ganking didn’t make me leave. If anything it invoked a Khan type ’ revenge is a dish best served cold ’ attitude that kept me in the game. Ganking also got me out of spending 90% of my time being a carebear miner….which is boring and was infinitely more likely to make me leave the game.
Ganking made me stay. And likely many others too. And you probably don’t hear that as often because the crying carebears are more vocal.
I have been playing for over a year now; been Suicide ganked twice. I can count on one hand the number of people that I know that have left because of Suicide Ganking, and most of those were unhappy with other aspects of the game as well
Every game has winners and losers.
You are getting very personal. Why?
Calling me a scrublord, cause i voice my concerns over the game is not constructive. CCP havent said its a myth at all, reread what they said. Tons of people have quit the game after getting ganked, pretending otherwise is disingenious.
Why would i lie though? My true aim here is to just mess up your game? I dont think thats a sensical motivating factor.
